Cofacilitation: Managing structures and processes

To facilitate a group event, facilitators plan the structures and processes through which the group will work together and then support individuals and the group to do the work and to achieve their identified goals. When there are two or more facilitators, they share the responsibility for the design and implementation of the structures and processes.

One of the simple, but often overlooked, ways of improving the experience of cofacilitation is to ‘walk the talk’; to have structures and processes of working together and supporting one another so that co-facilitators can, in turn, work with the group.

A standard practice in facilitation is to develop guidelines or ‘ground rules’ with group participants about what will be acceptable and unacceptable. Sometimes these will embedded in negotiations about the objectives and the agenda at the contracting stage of managing the event. Sometimes the majority of the ‘rules’ are set by the facilitator and added to by the group.

Ground rules can include who may speak, for how long and about what. They may stipulate that people speak only of their own experience and not of others, with trust, honesty and kindness and that speakers will not be interrupted. They may require people to actively listen, to recognise the experience and expertise of each person and to accept that not everyone will think like, or process information in the same way.  They may ask people to support each other, work to develop trust, respect each other, accept responsibility for themselves and work to resolve difficulties. Committing to the task, respecting boundaries, respecting culture and context, and being open to learning are guidelines that may or may not be explicitly stated.

Cofacilitators similarly benefit from guidelines or ‘ground rules’ for working together. Understandings about speaking and listening help facilitators negotiate the sharing of power and responsibility. A common purpose, clarity about the nature of each task and knowing which role each facilitator is taking for each part of the process help co-facilitators remain focused on the group process. Being willing to learn and open to what emerges help each facilitator to hold their commitments lightly so that if changes are required, they can be flexible to make them. An additional guideline might be to have fun.

A group event includes different structures. Usually, there is an ‘opening’ that introduces the people, the purpose of the event and builds trust. There may be a time for gathering information or different perspectives, a time of divergence. There may be intentional provocations to encourage creativity. There may be a focus on decision making or problem solving, a time of convergence. There may be development of an action plan or a link to practice. There may be a time for reflection: on the event, on people’s engagement and/or the outcome. Finally, there may be a period of social interaction, perhaps with coffee, tea or wine!

In a similar way, co-facilitators can develop structures for their work together in planning and reviewing the group event. Such an agenda has the same benefits as occurs for the group.

Within each structure, there is a choice of processes. Exercises, simulations, role plays, discussions, experiments, brainstorming, nominal group processes, real life examples, modelling, activities, peer tutoring, collaborative tasks, problem solving, red teaming, visualisation, raps, songs, poems,  metaphors and analogies, drawings, constructions, art, field trips and games are some of the plethora of possibilities. Processes support the group to manage the complex work required.

Processes may be specific to a structure or used across different structures. For example, a ‘clinic’ might use a specific framework to facilitate the resolution of a problem or a conflict but physical exercises might be used in the opening stages of a session to focus people on an issue, as a way of re-energising people in the difficult process of exploring a topic or solutions to a problem or as a way of reflecting on the experience of the group session. Having a repertoire of processes enables co-facilitators to find ways to address particular needs as they arise.

Similarly, cofacilitators can benefit from using different processes as they work together.

One of the tricky parts of facilitating a group is deciding how much time is required and invested on a structure or process.

Jumping in too soon may prevent the group participants from deepening their thinking and developing new strategies. Dwelling on a particular issue may concentrate the agenda on an issue that is a minor part of the process.

On the other hand, moving quickly may maintain energy and result in the creation of a product within the time frame, while addressing an emerging issue may result in the group functioning more effectively within and beyond the facilitated event.

In cofacilitation, the challenge is multiplied. Each cofacilitator is likely to have different understandings of the need for intervention, to change directions or adopt completely different structures or processes.

While communication is key, how much time do co-facilitators invest in making their thinking transparent? Will renegotiating the structures or processes support the group or cut across their thinking? Does the relationship between the cofacilitators take precedent over the relationship with the group?

These questions can be added to cofacilitators ‘ground rules’ for working together.

Have you discussed your cofacilitation ground rules? Do you walk your talk, using a similar model for your work together as you use for the group? Have you explored different processes in planning your work together? Want to explore this more? Give me a call!